These illustrative Journals are my way of sharing tips and tricks and knowledge that I've acquired over the last few years in the illustration industry. I'm simply sharing it with you all in the hopes that it helps somebody. If you too would like to offer some tips and tricks, please note me and I'll include it. This is for those who wish to learn after all.


This week I bring you an oldie. I thought that it would do some good to pull out some of the old art journals from when I had first started them. This was the first journal I did on critiques and I heard good feedback on it, I've edited through a little of it, refreshed parts, and generally cleaned it up. There's no sense in recycling old ideas if older subjects were helpful to people.

So enjoy. As always, if you have questions, my door never closes.


Critiques, the final frontier

I'd like to go over critiques. You would think they're pretty straight forward, but time and time again I see people complaining about several things, most of which revolve around nobody seeming to know how to give them. There is no set way to do a critique, some people say things like “You should say something you hate, and then something nice! And then maybe another thing you dislike!” This, my friends, is a load of crap. Critiques aren't popularity contests where you slap a person, butter em up, and slap em again. If somebody wants a critique you tell them exactly what's on your mind about the image, it's up to you to do it politely or rudely. That's up to you. Don't follow a routine for it, just tell them things that are important.

But none of us want to be mean. We don't always understand how to say something about an image nicely. It takes some practice, and the urge to want to be helpful. If you mean well, in the end all you have to do is try.

First thing is first, find out if the artist really wants a critique. There is nothing more annoying than some child saying “I want a critique” and then defending their accidents down to the shaky little ink lines. Please. If you want a critique, you open yourself to advice. So I would recommend trying to look at an artist like a psychologist for lack of a better term. How do you think this person is going to react to your information? Do they seem to say they want a critique because it's the right thing to do? Or do you think they truly want to improve? You can figure these things out by wording, and by their other work. If you browse quickly through somebody's gallery you can easily tell if they improve quickly or not. If they improve fast, chances are they take crits. If they put up the same old thing over and over again – chances are they're going to ignore anything you say. In that case, smile and nod and go find a real artist.

This takes some practice and investigation, but in the end it's up to you. But what in the world would you talk about?! Next time you critique an image (and I urge you to do so soon so that you can see how some of this information works) look at it and the first thoughts in your head should be “what do I like, what do I not like”. I don't really care if you're an artist or not either - this is one of the biggest excuses I hear actually: “I'm not an artist, where would I begin?” But the thing is, you like art, you know what appeals to you and what does not. If you are not attracted to an image, there's reasons for it, and you should be able to tell what that is if you look at it long enough.

Your initial thoughts are the most important. You should be able to look at composition and focal points automatically. Where is your attention first drawn to? How does your eye move? Or does it not move at all? If it doesn't then you have the beginning of a good critique most likely. How about color use? I'd expect many of you to have a relatively acceptable idea of colors after earlier art journals, based on that knowledge and some personal experience you should be able to identify compliments and anything that doesn't stand out correctly, or perhaps too much. Even if we don't know how to use colors that well, when they aren't used correctly in somebody else's work, we can often tell.

What about anatomy? Does the figure look really bad proportionately? Chances are it will, honestly even professional artists need to look at anatomy a bit more, this should be one of the main things to look at in a critique each and every time. If a joint doesn't look right (anatomy joints....) you should know it.... afterall you are a person and you've got plenty of them yourself, tell the artist, they may be tired of the image and just could have tossed it out without thinking. Remind them to look harder at those anatomical things before calling it done. It's very common.

But is some of this information hard to swallow for people? You bet. I'm pretty used to critiques and sometimes I still run into advice that makes me want to throttle the guy or gal critiquing, but as the artist it's my obligation to swallow pride and take the advice... some people understand this, some don't. So you need to understand that you need to focus on all sorts of advice, even good things need pointed out so that the artist knows what to do correctly again. Is this buttering the artist up for more stuff to be pointed out? No, but it is good to do.... people need to hear that things are done correctly so that they can actually do the same thing again. A critique does not always focus on the bad – it focus' on improving an artist.

So that's mostly what goes through at least my head in a critique. Those who are more versed in art will take your critiques better than someone who does art for a hobby with no intention of following it as a career.

Oh! Sorry, forgot some stuff.

When you start to critique a piece of art, two things, one – make sure it's not really old! People can't improve on old art all that well, chances are they've already passed that point anyway. I still get critiques on art that's nearly three years old..... how is this helpful for me? It's not. Try and focus on current work. It's fresh, it's where the person is. I get aggravated when people send me a year old piece or older for advice...... I don't want to see your old work, I want to see new and current work so that I can tell exactly where you are. And I guarantee that a publisher will want to see current work as well.

But the other thing I wanted to talk about there has nothing to do with that, it has to do with how to start the critique. I'm just too lazy to go insert this paragraph up above, so you'll have to edit it in yourself mentally. Blah on you.

When you start a critique I'd recommend coming straight out and telling the artist your intentions. “First of all I hope you are looking for critiques because I think there's somethings you could work on, with these things your image could greatly improve.” Something along that line. Don't tell them the image sucks, chances are it doesn't! Even a person with art that has a great anatomical difficulty deserves respect because the artist probably tried where others did not. Give them the benefit of the doubt here. This person is putting their art on the line here, even if they don't see it that way. In a sense I guess you could say respect is the underlying theme on a critique. Don't talk down to another artist – this person is your peer, and you should treat them as such.

If they don't learn from critiques but keep insisting they want them? Be a bit more blunt if you need to. Get the idea across that you want to help the artist but they have to want that help. You can't force a person to improve, don't let them waste your time.

And finally remember, that this advice goes not only to those wanting to give critiques, but to those receiving them. You may receive a critique that you don't like, but remember that in the end it's only to improve you in the end. If somebody wants to bash you, there are better ways to do it than through your art. Defend your work if you must, but it won't change the fact that you might have forgotten something or messed up somewhere, own up to it.... take it... improve from it.